1. On December 11, 2014, the Defendant imposed KRW 3,010,00,000 on the Plaintiff’s charge for compelling compliance.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the building B located in Jung-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant building”).

B. The Defendant imposed KRW 14,305,00 for enforcement fines, KRW 14,202,00 for enforcement fines, around December 7, 2012, and KRW 14,202,00 for enforcement fines, around December 10, 201, on the Plaintiff on the ground that the first floor of the instant building was extended without permission, and paid the said enforcement fines by the Plaintiff.

C. As of September 5, 2014, the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to correct the violation until October 10, 2014, on the ground that the Plaintiff failed to comply with the corrective order for the above unauthorized extension, and the Defendant again imposed KRW 14,202,00 (207 in the location B, year of occurrence, 2007, structural connection/protruding stones, steel materials, warehouse, area for use, 154 square meters) for enforcement fines (154 square meters in the location B, year of occurrence, and year of occurrence), and ordered the Plaintiff to correct the violation by November 22, 2014 as of October 22, 2014, and if the violation was not corrected by the above period, the Defendant again imposed the enforcement fines at KRW 14,202,00 (2,07 in the year of occurrence, 207, structural connection/protruding, building materials, size of steel, warehouse, size of 154 square meters).

On December 11, 2014, the Defendant imposed KRW 14,202,00 on the Plaintiff for non-performance penalty pursuant to Article 80 of the Building Act on the ground that the violation was not corrected.

(hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"). / [Grounds for recognition] The entry of Gap 1, 3, and Eul 1, 2, and 6 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Whether the disposition is lawful;

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) is that the Plaintiff installed a facility to cover the instant facility (hereinafter “instant facility”) with a transparent KON, which is part of the outside part of the instant building, 154 square meters, and cover the said facility with the transparent KON (hereinafter “KON”). The instant facility is a structure fixed on the land.